Are We Good Enough
for Liberty?
Are We Good Enough
for Liberty?
By Lawrence W. Reed
Foundation for Economic Education
Atlanta
Jameson Books, Inc.
Ottawa, Illinois
Copyright © 2013 Foundation for Economic Education, Irvington, NY, and
Atlanta, GA.
Published under Creative Commons Non-Commercial, No-Derivative
Works 3.0 Unported License.
Sharing and reprinting of up to a third of each of the essays included in this
book for noncommercial use is allowed, without obtaining prior permission,
provided FEE is attributed as the original source of the material. Notification
of such use is requested. Credit should include the Foundation’s name and
URL, FEE.org. For larger sections of text, or for other inquiries, please
contact the Foundation for Economic Education directly:
1-800-960-4FEE (4333)
Foundation for Economic Education
30 S. Broadway
Irvington, New York 10533
Foundation for Economic Education
260 Peachtree St. NW
Suite 2200
Atlanta, GA 30303
ISBN-10: 0-89803-174-5
ISBN-13: 978-0-89803-174-4
Find FEE online at:
Facebook.com/FEEonline
Twitter.com/FEEonline (@feeonline)
For single and bulk mail orders, contact Jameson Books, Inc.
P.O. Box 738
Ottawa, IL 61350
800-426-1357
See bulk discounts coupon on the final page of this book.
Cover and text design by Charles King, ckmm.com
16 15 14 13 5 4 3 2 1
Printed in the United States of America
Contents
Foreword . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1
Liberty and Character:
The Indispensable Connection . . . . . . . . . .5
Introduction:
The Character Message of “I, Pencil” . . . . . 35
I, Pencil (By Leonard E. Read) . . . . . . . . . . . 39
Afterword (By Milton Friedman, 1976) . . . . . . 49
Resources and Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
Business Ethics (51), Cheating (54), Dependency (55),
Financial Responsibility (56), Literature/Writing (57),
Public Opinion (58)
About the Author . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
About FEE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
The Blinking Lights Initiative . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
Help Bring the Message of Character and
Liberty to Everyone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
Foreword
This small book conveys a very big message: character makes all the difference in the world. You are
personally in charge of your own character and are
in a position to have a considerable influence on the
character of others by your example. If you have a
conscience, this should matter a great deal to you.
If you value liberty, you must understand that character is an indispensable ingredient—a necessary
pre-condition—for a free society.
I’ll venture one step further and offer this thought,
upon which I have elaborated in other places and
publications: no people who lost their character kept
their liberties. That may be the most important lesson
from the last five thousand years of human history.
In my visits to communist countries before the
collapse of the Soviet Union, I witnessed the power
of character as it eroded an evil system. In Poland
in 1986 I met secretly with a very brave couple,
Zbigniew and Sofia Romaszewski. They had only
lately been released from prison for running an illegal underground radio station that broadcasted a
message of liberty for Poland.
“How did you know if people were listening?” I
asked. Sofia answered, “We could only broadcast
eight to ten minutes at a time before moving on to
another place to stay ahead of the police. One night
we asked people to blink their lights if they believed
1
2 Are We Good Enough for Liberty?
in freedom. We then went to the window and for
hours, all of Warsaw was blinking.” The Iron Curtain
fell in Poland and across Eastern Europe in 1989, in
large part because of such heroes with character.
They never gave up working for what they knew
was right.
That story is the genesis of the Foundation for
Economic Education’s (FEE) ambitious “Blinking
Lights Project,” launched in the spring of 2013. It
aims to inspire and educate young people in the
principles of character, liberty, and entrepreneurship—and how those three critical elements of a free
society are inextricably linked. Character comes first
and makes liberty possible, and one of the highest
and most noble callings of a responsible adult in a
free society is to be an honest entrepreneur who
creates value, employs people, and solves problems.
This book is one component of FEE’s Blinking
Lights Project. Another is the wide distribution of
the 2006 film “Amazing Grace.” In coming months
and years, the project will also involve seminars and
other publications focused on the themes of character, liberty, and entrepreneurship. You can learn
more about it by visiting http://FEE.org/blp. We
hope you will join us in this endeavor by attending
a seminar or sponsoring a student, by distributing
our materials including copies of this book, and by
contributing financially if you can.
Former British Prime Minister William Ewart
Gladstone once said, “We look forward to the day
when the power of love replaces the love of power.
Are We Good Enough for Liberty? 3
Only then will the world know the blessings of
peace.” Those words constitute both a warning and
a promise. Gladstone was essentially calling us all to
lives of character. Do we have the courage and the
wisdom to put character at the top of our priorities? I dread the consequences if the answer proves
to be “No.”
—Lawrence W. Reed, President
Foundation for Economic Education
Newnan, Georgia
July 2013
Liberty and Character:
The Indispensable Connection
(This is an expanded edition of what was originally
delivered as a Commencement address in 2006 at the
Thomas Jefferson Independent Day School in Joplin,
Missouri, and in 2007 at the Brookfield Academy in
Brookfield, Wisconsin. Mr. Reed has since delivered versions of this address before audiences all over the world.)
In 1987 something quite remarkable happened in
the little town of Conyers, Georgia. When school
officials there discovered that one of their basketball players who had played 45 seconds in the first
of the school’s five post-season games had actually
been scholastically ineligible, they returned the
state championship trophy their beloved Rockdale
Bulldogs had just won a few weeks before. If they
had simply kept quiet, probably no one else would
have ever known about it and they could have retained the trophy.
To their eternal credit, the team and the town, dejected though they were, rallied behind the school’s
decision. Coach Cleveland Stroud said, “We didn’t
know he was ineligible at the time . . . but you’ve got
to do what’s honest and right and what the rules say.
I told my team that people forget the scores of the
games; they don’t ever forget what you’re made of.”
5
6 Are We Good Enough for Liberty?
In the minds of most, it didn’t matter that the
championship title was forfeited. The coach and the
team were still champions—in more ways than one.
Could you have mustered the courage under similar
circumstances to do as they did?
Commencement addresses at both high schools
and colleges are full of paeans and platitudes that reduce to one cliché: “You are the future.” Well, that’s
an important point but it’s also something we already know because it’s pretty self-evident, wouldn’t
you say? So I’ll not tell you in a dozen different ways
that the future is yours. You should already know
that. I have a different message.
I want to talk to you about one thing that is
more important than all the good grades you’ve
earned, more important than all the high school
and college degrees you’ll accumulate, and indeed, more important than all the knowledge
you’ll ever absorb in your lifetimes. It’s something over which every responsible, thinking
adult has total, personal control and yet millions
of people every year sacrifice it for very little. It
will not only define and shape your future; it will
put both a concrete floor under it and an iron
ceiling over it. It’s what the world will remember you for more than probably anything else.
It’s not your looks, it’s not your talents, it’s not
your ethnicity and ultimately, it may not even
be anything you ever say. What is this incredibly
powerful thing I’m talking about? In a word, it’s
character.
Are We Good Enough for Liberty? 7
You need to know that character is indispensable to a successful career, a happy life, and a clear
conscience. Without it, you ain’t goin’ anywhere. I
recommend that you bulk up on it; if you do, you’ll be
amazed at how most if not all of the other elements
of a successful career will eventually fall into place.
On frequent occasions it will more than compensate
for mistakes and shortcomings in other areas.
From an employer’s perspective, Warren Buffett
makes the point plainly: “In looking for someone
to hire, you look for three qualities: integrity, intelligence, and energy. But the most important is
integrity [a synonym for character], because if they
don’t have that, the other two qualities, intelligence
and energy, are going to kill you.”
Character is what the coach and the players in
Conyers, Georgia, possessed. And what an example
they set! Many of us will be telling that story for a
long, long time. People with character set a standard
and exert a pressure on others to strive to meet it.
A Poor But Honest Man
Here’s another example from personal experience:
In my travels to some eighty-one countries around
the world, I have witnessed many sterling examples
of personal character (as well as the startling lack of
it), but this is one of the best.
In 1989 I visited Cambodia with my late friend Dr.
Haing S. Ngor (who won an Academy Award for his
role in the movie “The Killing Fields”). In advance of
the trip, there was considerable local press attention
8 Are We Good Enough for Liberty?
because I was rustling up donated medical supplies
to take with me to give to a hospital in the capital,
Phnom Penh. A woman from a local church who
saw the news stories called and explained that a
few years before, her church had helped Cambodian
families who had escaped from the Khmer Rouge
communists and resettled in the town where I was
living at the time—Midland, Michigan. The families
had moved on to other locations in the United States
but stayed in touch with the woman who called me
and other friends they had made in Midland.
The woman—Sharon Hartlein is her name—said
she had told her Cambodian friends about my pending visit. Each family asked if I would take letters
with cash enclosed to their relatives in Cambodia.
I said yes.
Two of the families were in Phnom Penh and easy
to find, but one was many miles away in Battambang.
Going there would have involved a train ride, some
personal risk, and a lot of time it turned out I didn’t
have. I was advised in any event not to return with
any money. If I couldn’t locate any of the families I
was told to just give the cash to any needy Cambodian
I could find (and they were everywhere!).
On the day before my return home, when I realized I just wasn’t going to make it to Battambang, I
approached a man in tattered clothes whom I had
seen several times in the hotel lobby. He always
smiled and said hello, and spoke enough English
so that we could briefly converse. He, like most
Cambodians at that time, was practically penniless.
Are We Good Enough for Liberty? 9
You can be sure that the status of his 401K plan never
came up in our conversations.
“I have an envelope with a letter and $200 in it,
addressed to a family in Battambang. Do you think
you could get it to them?” I asked. “If you do, I
want you to keep $50 of it for your trouble and expense and give the rest to the family.” He consented,
and we said goodbye. I assumed I would never hear
anything of what had become of either him or the
money.
Several months later, I received an excited call
from Sharon. She said she had just received a letter
from the Cambodians in Virginia whose family in
Battambang that envelope was intended for. When
she read it on the phone, I couldn’t help but shed a
few tears. The letter read, “Thank you for the two
hundred dollars!”
That poor man found his way to Battambang, and
he not only didn’t keep the $50 I plainly offered, he
somehow found a way to pay for the $10 train ride
himself. Now, that is character! I think I would probably trust my life in his hands, even though I never
got to know him and didn’t ask him for his address.
To help us understand what character is, let me
tell you what the absence of it looks like. Sadly, evidence of a lack of character is in abundance these
days.
In 1995 students on the quiz team at Steinmetz
High School in Chicago made national news when
it was discovered that they had cheated to win a
statewide academic contest. With the collaboration
10 Are We Good Enough for Liberty?
of their teacher, they worked from a stolen copy of
a test to look up and memorize the correct answers
in advance. Perhaps worse than the initial deed was
the attitude of the same students five years later, expressed in The New York Times by one of them this
way: “Apologize for what? I would do it again.”
What a contrast to the values on display in the
Conyers story—and even more so the Cambodian
one! No one would say that the teacher or those
students in Chicago exhibited character in the positive sense that I am using the term here. Assume for
a moment that the Chicago students had never been
caught. Knowing everything else that I’ve told you
in these true stories, which group of students would
you most want to be like—the ones in Conyers who
walked away from a trophy or the ones in Chicago
who cheated to win a contest? If you said Conyers,
then you have a conscience. You have character, and
hopefully a lot of it. And you know something of the
inestimable value of being able to look back on your
life some day and know that you tried hard in every
circumstance to do the right thing.
I love the words of the Apostle Paul, in prison,
shortly before he was martyred. It is recorded in
Scripture as II Timothy 4:7: “I have fought the good
fight, I have finished the race, I have kept the faith.”
He had character, even in the midst of extreme adversity. If he had sacrificed it for short-term, selfish
gain, all his good words and deeds would hardly
carry the weight they do today, nearly twenty centuries later.
Are We Good Enough for Liberty? 11
Where Does Character Come From?
A deficit of character shows up every time somebody
who knows the right thing to do neither defends it
nor does it because doing so might mean a little discomfort or inconvenience. When I was president of
the Mackinac Center for Public Policy in Michigan,
from 1987 to 2008, I worked in the field of public
policy. The job brought me into frequent contact
with legislators, congressmen, and candidates for
public office. Far too many times I heard words like
these: “I know you’re right, but I can’t say so or vote
that way because I won’t get reelected.”
You can blame a politician when he behaves that
way but don’t forget the voters who put him in that
spot. I see character deficits every time I see people
pressuring the government to give them something
at the expense of others, something which they
know in their very gut should come instead from
their own efforts and merit. I see it every time voters
reward a corrupt officeholder with praise and reelection. Effectively bought and paid for with other
people’s money, they compromise their integrity
and independence for a handout, a subsidy, a special privilege.
Perhaps we should ask, “Where does character
come from?” or, putting the question slightly differently, “Why is it that when we speak of character,
we all seem to know what it is that we’re talking
about?” Theologians and philosophers can speak to
this much better than I can. But I will say this: There
12 Are We Good Enough for Liberty?
is something in the way that we humans are wired.
Down deep within us we have a sense of what is right
and what is wrong, what is good and what is bad.
And when we ignore our wiring, something within
us—that voice we call our conscience—cries out to
us. In complex situations, the voice can be difficult
to discern, and we can even learn how to dull that
voice into submission, but we cannot really deny that
it is there. It is simply the human experience. We can
argue about its origins, but it is there.
When a person spurns his conscience and fails
to do what he knows is right, he subtracts from
his character. When he evades his responsibilities,
succumbs to temptation, foists his problems and
burdens on others, or fails to exert self-discipline,
he subtracts from his character. When he attempts
to reform the world without reforming himself first,
he subtracts from his character.
A person’s character is nothing more and nothing less than the sum of his choices. You can’t
choose your height or race or many other physical traits, but you fine tune your character every
time you decide right from wrong and what you
personally are going to do about it. Your character is further defined by how you choose to
interact with others and the standards of speech
and conduct you practice. Character is often
listed as a key leadership quality. I actually think
character and leadership are one and the same. If
you’ve got character, others will look upon you
as a leader—not in the sense that they are eager
Are We Good Enough for Liberty? 13
to be subservient to you but in the sense that you
are someone they admire and freely desire to
emulate.
Ravaged by conflict, corruption and tyranny, the
world is starving for people of character. Indeed, as
much as anything, it is on this matter that the fate
of individual liberty has always depended. A free
society flourishes when people seek to be models
of honor, honesty, and propriety at whatever the
cost in material wealth, social status, or popularity. It
descends into barbarism when they abandon what’s
right in favor of self-gratification at the expense of
others; when lying, cheating, or stealing are winked
at instead of shunned. If you want to be free, if you
want to live in a free society, you must assign top
priority to raising the caliber of your character and
learning from those who already have it in spades.
If you do not govern yourself, you will be governed.
Character means that there are no matters too
small to handle the right way. It’s been said that your
character is defined by what you do when no one is
looking. Cutting corners because “it won’t matter
much” or “no one will notice” still knocks your character down a notch and can easily become a slippery
slope. “Unless you are faithful in small matters,” we
learn in Luke 16:10, “you will not be faithful in large
ones.” That’s a message that shows up in the teachings of many faiths. Even those of no faith should
see the wisdom of it.
Chief among the elements that define strong
character are these: honesty, humility, patience,
14 Are We Good Enough for Liberty?
responsibility, self-discipline, self-reliance, optimism, courage, a long-term focus, and a lust for
learning. Who in his right mind would want to live
in a world without these things?
Dishonest people will lie and cheat and become
even bigger liars and cheaters in elected office.
People who lack humility become arrogant, condescending, know-it-all central-planner types.
Irresponsible citizens blame others for the consequences of their own poor judgment. People who
will not discipline themselves invite the intrusive
control of others. Those who eschew self-reliance
are easily manipulated by those on whom they are
dependent. Pessimists dismiss what individuals can
accomplish when given the freedom to try. Timid
people will allow their rights to be trampled. Myopic
citizens will mortgage their future for the sake of a
short-term “solution.” Closed-minded, head-in-thesand types don’t learn from the lessons of history
and human action.
Ever since Samuel Smiles wrote his remarkably
influential Self Help in 1859, hundreds of books in
the same vein have appeared in print. Twentiethcentury authors like Dale Carnegie (How to Win
Friends and Influence People) and John Maxwell (The
21 Indispensable Qualities of a Leader: Becoming the
Person Others Will Want to Follow) and Stephen
Covey (The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People)
sold millions of copies of their works, all aimed at
inspiring people to improve their attitudes or work
habits or personal character. So obviously there’s
Are We Good Enough for Liberty? 15
been a lot of interest for a long time in at least
reading about self-improvement, even if we don’t
actually do it.
The Importance of Gratitude
An often-overlooked but remarkably important
character trait is gratitude. I recently picked up a
cheap secondhand copy of a 2008 paperback by Dr.
Robert A. Emmons entitled Thanks! How Practicing
Gratitude Can Make You Happier. Emmons is a
professor at the University of California and editorin-chief of the Journal of Positive Psychology. At first,
I thought I’d skim a few pages, glean a few quotable quotes and then stick it on the shelf with all
the other self-improvement books gathering dust
in my basement. But this one grabbed my attention
on the first page. I couldn’t put it down until I read
the other 208.
This isn’t just a feel-good collection of generalities
and catchy phrases. It’s rooted in what the latest science can teach us. In language a lay reader can easily
understand, Emmons reveals groundbreaking research into the previously under-examined emotion
we call “gratitude.” As defined by Emmons, gratitude
is the acknowledgement of goodness in one’s life and
the recognition that the source of this goodness lies
at least partially outside one’s self.
Years of study by Emmons and his associates
show that “grateful people experience higher levels
of positive emotions such as joy, enthusiasm, love,
happiness, and optimism, and that the practice of
16 Are We Good Enough for Liberty?
gratitude as a discipline protects a person from the
destructive impulses of envy, resentment, greed,
and bitterness.”
A grateful attitude enriches life. Emmons believes
it elevates, energizes, inspires, and transforms. The
science of it proves that gratitude is an indispensable
key to happiness (the more of it you can muster, the
happier you’ll be), and happiness adds up to nine
years to life expectancy. Think about it: haven’t you
noticed that people of lousy character are rarely
grateful for anything?
Gratitude isn’t just a knee-jerk, unthinking “thank
you.” It’s much more than a warm and fuzzy sentiment. It’s not automatic. Some people, in fact, feel
and express it all too rarely. And as grateful a person as you may think you are, chances are you can
develop an even more grateful attitude, a task that
carries ample rewards that more than compensate
for its moral and intellectual challenges.
Emmons cites plenty of evidence for his thesis but
most readers will find his seventh and final chapter,
a mere twenty-four pages, the most useful part of
the book. There the author lays out ten steps (exercises, in fact) for cultivating this critically important
emotion. If I had space to tell you here what those
steps were, you might not read the book. So if you
want a serious self-improvement book, pick this
one up. I guarantee that you’ll be grateful for the
recommendation.
I firmly believe that good example is the best
teaching device. That’s a view I share with my
Are We Good Enough for Liberty? 17
friend Mark Hyatt, whose influential Character and
Education Project is working with schools to help
make this very point. We tend to learn and remember stories, especially stories of real people. So to
impress the importance of character upon you, I
want to tell you about a few more exemplars of it.
Here’s one from the 2005 movie “Cinderella Man.”
The film is a masterpiece from start to finish, but
I especially loved an early scene in which boxer
James Braddock (played by Russell Crowe) learns
that his young son has stolen a sausage. The family
is hungry and destitute at the bottom of the Great
Depression. The boy was fearful that, like one of
his friends whose parents couldn’t provide enough
to eat, he would be sent to live with relatives who
could afford the expense. Braddock does not hesitate on the matter for a second. He immediately
escorts the boy to the store to return the sausage
and apologize to the butcher. He then lectures his
son:
“There’s a lot of people worse off than we are. And
just because things ain’t easy, that don’t give you the
excuse to take what’s not yours, does it? That’s stealing, right? We don’t steal. No matter what happens,
we don’t steal. Not ever. You got me?”
His son replies, “Yes,” but Braddock presses the
point, two more times: “Are you giving me your
word?”
“Yes.”
“Come on.”
“I promise.”
18 Are We Good Enough for Liberty?
Braddock’s character ascends to new heights later
in the film when he does what no welfare recipient
is ever asked to do and what perhaps not one in a
million has ever done: he pays the taxpayers back.
Now that is character! And he certainly knew how
to encourage those qualities in his son—both by his
words and by his example.
Hollywood turns out so little these days that inspires character but in 2005 it did produce another
movie that I rank among the very best of all time. It’s
“The Greatest Game Ever Played,” the true story of
the son of an immigrant, Francis Ouimet, who won
the 1913 U.S. Open Golf Championship at the age
of twenty. Buy it, or rent it, and watch it as a study
in character. Both the main figure, Francis, and the
story’s secondary hero, Harry Vardon, ooze character from every pore. The traits they so magnificently
exhibit include professionalism, perseverance, integrity, sportsmanship, loyalty, and honor. You watch
that movie and you’ll come away with boundless admiration for Francis and Harry and it’s not so much
for their great golf abilities as it is because of their
sterling characters.
In history, the men and women we most admire
and best remember are those whose character stands
out because they lived it twenty-four hours every
day and did not compromise it. They are not like
that fictional character played by the great comedian
Groucho Marx, who said, “Those are my principles!
If you don’t like them, well, I have others.”
Are We Good Enough for Liberty? 19
Changing the Conscience of a Nation
Consider William Wilberforce, the man from
Yorkshire who more than any other single individual
was responsible for ending slavery throughout the
British Empire. His story was recently told in a wonderful biography by Eric Metaxas called “Amazing
Grace” and in a beautiful 2006 film by the same title
(I highly recommend them both).
Born in 1759, Wilberforce never had the physical presence one would hope to possess in a fight.
Boswell called him a “shrimp.” Thin and short,
Wilberforce compensated with a powerful vision,
an appealing eloquence, and an indomitable will.
Elected to Parliament in 1780 at the age of twentyone, Wilberforce spoke out against the war with
America in no uncertain terms, labeling it “cruel,
bloody, and impractical.” But he drifted from issue
to issue without a central focus until a conversion to
Christianity sparked what would be a lifelong calling. Revolted by the hideous barbarity of the slave
trade then prevalent in the world, he determined in
October 1787 to work for its abolition.
Abolitionism was a tall order in the late 1700s.
Viewed widely at the time as integral to British naval
and commercial success, slavery was big business. It
enjoyed broad political support, as well as widespread
(though essentially racist) intellectual justification.
For seventy-five years before Wilberforce set about
to end the trade in slaves, and ultimately slavery itself, Britain enjoyed the sole right by treaty to supply
20 Are We Good Enough for Liberty?
Spanish colonies with captured Africans. The trade
was lucrative for British slavers but savagely merciless for its millions of victims.
Wilberforce labored relentlessly for his cause,
forming and assisting organizations to spread the
word about the inhumanity of one man owning
another. “Our motto must continue to be perseverance,” he once told followers. And what a model of
perseverance he was! He endured and overcame just
about every obstacle imaginable, including ill health,
derision from his colleagues, and defeats almost too
numerous to count. In any respect, he maintained
the highest standard of character, a fact which itself
served as a powerful magnet for his cause.
He rose in the House of Commons to give his first
abolition speech in 1789, not knowing that it would
take another eighteen years before the slave trade
would be ended by law. Every year he would introduce an abolition measure, and every year it would
go nowhere. At least once, some of his own allies
deserted him because the opposition gave them free
tickets to attend the theatre during a crucial vote.
The war with France that began in the 1790s often
put the slavery issue on the back burner. A bloody
slave rebellion in the Caribbean seemed to give ammunition to the other side. Wilberforce was often
ridiculed and condemned as a traitorous rabblerouser. He had reason to fear for his life.
Once, in 1805 after yet another defeat in Parliament, Wilberforce was advised by a clerk of the
Commons to give up the fight. He replied with the
Are We Good Enough for Liberty? 21
air of undying optimism that had come to characterize his stance on the issue: “I do expect to carry it.”
Indeed, what seemed once to be an impossible
dream became reality in 1807. Abolition of the slave
trade won Parliament’s overwhelming approval.
Biographer David J. Vaughan reports that “as the
attorney general, Sir Samuel Romilly, stood and
praised the perseverance of Wilberforce, the House
rose to its feet and broke out in cheers. Wilberforce
was so overcome with emotion that he sat head
in hand, tears streaming down his face.” Boswell’s
shrimp had become a whale.
The trade in slaves was officially over, but ending
slavery itself remained the ultimate prize. To bring
it about, Wilberforce worked for another twenty-six
years, even after he left behind nearly a quartercentury of service in Parliament in 1825. The great
day finally came on July 26, 1833, when Britain enacted a peaceful emancipation (with compensation
to slaveholders) and became the world’s first major
nation to unshackle an entire race within its jurisdiction. Hailed as the hero who made it possible,
Wilberforce died three days later. He and his allies
had changed the conscience of a nation.
The lessons of Wilberforce’s life reduce to this: a
worthy goal should always inspire. Don’t let any setback slow you up. Maintain an optimism worthy of
the goal itself, and do all within your character and
power to rally others to the cause.
Anne Frank may well be the most famous
15-year-old author of the twentieth century. She
22 Are We Good Enough for Liberty?
penned but one volume, a diary, while hiding from
the Nazis during the German occupation of the
Netherlands. “How wonderful it is,” she wrote,
“that nobody need wait a single moment before
starting to improve the world.”
Imagine it. Living each day for two years crammed
in the hidden rooms of an office building, knowing
that at any moment you might be found and hauled
off to near-certain death at a concentration camp.
Barely a teenager, she managed to write those and
many other words of remarkable inspiration before
she and her family were discovered in August 1944.
They were sent to the Bergen-Belsen camp where
Anne died in March 1945, just three months before
her sixteenth birthday.
How is it possible for a youngster to see so much
light in a dark world, to find within her so much
hope and optimism amidst horror? What insight!
What power! What character! That’s been the magic
of Anne Frank for the past seven decades.
Anne Frank’s message will be remembered for
many more decades to come, hopefully forever. It
reminds us that no matter the circumstances, we
can make a difference. Our attitude (which itself is
largely a function of our character) determines our
altitude. If you want to make a better world, start
by making a better self; it’s the one thing you have
considerable control over in almost any situation.
Are We Good Enough for Liberty? 23
Character Saves Lives
From that same era comes the story of Nicholas
Winton. At this writing (Spring 2013), he is still alive
and well at 104. He’s a personal friend who lives just
outside of London.
Winton was a young London stockbroker as
war clouds gathered across Europe in 1938-39. A
friend convinced him to forgo a Christmas vacation in Switzerland and come to Czechoslovakia
instead. Near Prague in December 1938 he was
shocked to see Jewish refugees freezing in makeshift camps. Most had been driven from their homes
by Nazi occupation of the Sudetenland, the part of
Czechoslovakia handed over to Hitler at Munich the
previous September. Winton could have resumed his Swiss vacation,
stepping back into the comfortable life he left behind. What could a lone foreigner do to assist so
many trapped families? Despite the talk of “peace
in our time,” Winton knew that Europe was sliding toward war and time was running out for these
desperate people. The next steps he took ultimately
saved 669 children from death in Nazi camps. The parents were anxious to get their children to
safety, even though it would mean sending them
off alone. Getting the children to a country that
would accept them seemed an impossible challenge.
Nicholas Winton didn’t waste a minute. He wrote
to governments around the world, pleading for an
open door, only to be rejected by every one but two:
24 Are We Good Enough for Liberty?
Sweden and his own Great Britain. He assembled a
small group of volunteers to assist with the effort.
Even his mother pitched in. With five thousand children on his list, Winton
searched for foster homes across Britain. British
newspapers published his advertisements to highlight the urgent need for foster parents. When
enough homes could be found for a group of children, he submitted the necessary paperwork to the
Home Office and assisted his team of volunteers in
organizing the rail and ship transportation needed
to get the children to Britain. He took the lead in
raising the funds to pay for the operation. The first twenty of “Winton’s children” left Prague
on March 14, 1939. Hitler’s troops devoured all of
Czechoslovakia the very next day, but Winton’s team
kept working, sometimes forging documents to slip
the children past the Germans. By the time World
War II broke out on September 1 the rescue effort
had taken 669 children out of the country in eight
separate groups by rail. The last batch of 250 would
have been the largest of all, but war prompted the
Nazis to stop all departures. Sadly, none of those
children lived to see the Allied victory less than six
years later. Pitifully few of the parents did either.
Why did Nicholas Winton take on a challenge ignored by almost everyone else? I asked him that very
question at his home in Maidenhead, England, in
2006. “Because it was the thing to do and I thought I
could help,” he told us. Today, the “Winton children”
Are We Good Enough for Liberty? 25
plus their children and grandchildren number about
six thousand people.
Winton’s example illustrates that character not
only enriches lives, it saves lives too.
George Washington was one of our best presidents
because he knew at every moment that maintaining
the highest standards in every aspect of life, public
and private, was critical to placing the new nation
on the right path. A man of lesser character might
not have carried us through such a critical period, or
would have put us on a different and more perilous
path. He drew the stunned admiration of the world
when he passed up the opportunity to seize power
for himself and placed his trust instead in a free and
virtuous people.
Washington understood the link between character and liberty. Listen to him speaking to the nation
in his Farewell Address of 1796:
It is substantially true that virtue and morality is
a necessary spring of popular government. The
rule, indeed, extends with more or less force to
every species of free government. Who that is
a sincere friend to it can look with indifference
upon attempts to shake the foundation of the
fabric?
Washington was hardly alone on this matter.
Another giant of liberty in that day, James Madison,
wrote in 1788 that “To suppose that any form of
26 Are We Good Enough for Liberty?
government will secure liberty or happiness without
any virtue in the people, is a chimerical idea.”
Untying the Gordian Knot
Thomas Jefferson’s words of wisdom on this issue
of character are well worth your serious attention:
Give up money, give up fame, give up science,
give up the earth itself and all it contains, rather
than do an immoral act. And never suppose, that
in any possible situation, or under any circumstances, it is best for you to do a dishonorable
thing, however slightly so it may appear to you.
Whenever you are to do a thing, though it can
never be known but to yourself, ask yourself
how you would act were all the world looking
at you, and act accordingly.
Encourage all your virtuous dispositions, and
exercise them whenever an opportunity arises;
being assured that they will gain strength by
exercise, as a limb of the body does, and that
exercise will make them habitual. From the
practice of the purest virtue, you may be assured you will derive the most sublime comforts
in every moment of life, and in the moment
of death. If ever you find yourself environed
with difficulties and perplexing circumstances,
out of which you are at a loss how to extricate
yourself, do what is right, and be assured that
that will extricate you the best out of the worst
situations.
Are We Good Enough for Liberty? 27
Though you cannot see, when you take one
step, what will be the next, yet follow truth,
justice, and plain dealing, and never fear their
leading you out of the labyrinth, in the easiest
manner possible. The knot which you thought
a Gordian one, will un-tie itself before you.
Nothing is so mistaken as the supposition that
a person is to extricate himself from a difficulty,
by intrigue, by chicanery, by dissimulation, by
trimming, by an untruth, by an injustice. This
increases the difficulties tenfold; and those who
pursue these methods, get themselves so involved at length, that they can turn no way but
their infamy becomes more exposed.
What those Founders were getting at is the
notion that liberty is built upon the ability of a
society to govern itself, without government intervention. This ability to self-govern is itself built
upon—you guessed it—individual character.
Here’s a name you may not have heard of: Fanny
Crosby. Fanny Crosby holds the record for having
written more hymns than any other human being—at least eight thousand—including the popular
“Blessed Assurance.” She died in 1915 at the age of
ninety-five. She was the first woman in our history to
address the United States Congress. She personally
met or knew every president of the United States
from John Quincy Adams to Woodrow Wilson,
maybe more than any other single person in our
country’s history, alive or dead. And guess what?
28 Are We Good Enough for Liberty?
She never in her ninety-five years had any recollection of ever having seen a thing. She was blind from
the age of six months, the result of a botched treatment for an eye infection. She spoke frequently and
in many places of how important it was for a person’s
character to shine so it could overcome any and all
handicaps and obstacles. Many who knew her regarded her as a saint of enormous inspiration.
By citing many people from the past, I certainly
don’t mean to suggest there aren’t heroes of character in our own time. Indeed, they are all around us,
though I sometimes fear their numbers are dwindling. Today’s heroes of character include teachers
who teach truth and defy political correctness;
businessmen and businesswomen who build their
enterprises without seeking special favors from political friends; parents who spend time with their
children and raise them properly in a world with
endless negative influences; and really, anyone who
tries to live his or her life in ways that don’t compromise integrity.
Over four decades I’ve written scores of articles,
essays, and columns on economics; taught the subject at the university level; and given hundreds of
speeches on it. In recent years the nexus between
the economics of a free society and individual character has worked its way into my writing, speaking,
and thinking with increasing emphasis. I now believe that nexus is the central issue we must address
if our liberties and free economy are to be restored
and preserved.
Are We Good Enough for Liberty? 29
Scholars and writers who believe in a free society have stressed the need for sound public-policy
research and basic economic education. In the past
thirty years or so, think tanks and new media have
sprung up like mushrooms to provide both. Though
important, they are proving to be insufficient to
overcome trends that are eroding our liberties.
Why?
The Missing Ingredient
To some extent, policy research (though I fully support it) is essentially locking the barn door after
the horse has left. It targets politicians and media
commentators at stages in their lives when they are
largely set in their ways and interested more in personal advancement than truth and liberty.
Economic education is certainly needed because
young minds are not typically getting it in schools.
But even if economic education were dramatically
improved, a free society wouldn’t necessarily follow.
Just like public-policy research, it can be undone by
harmful themes in popular culture (movies, religion,
music, literature, and even sports) and in the standards of conduct people practice as adults.
Even among the most ardent supporters of a free
society are people who “leak” when it comes to their
own bottom lines. A recent example was the corn
farmer who berated me for opposing ethanol subsidies. Does he not understand basic economics? I’ve
known him for years, and I believe he does. But that
understanding melted away with the corrupting lure
30 Are We Good Enough for Liberty?
of a handout. His extensive economics knowledge
was not enough to keep him from the public trough.
We are losing the sense of shame that once accompanied the act of theft, private or public.
The missing ingredient here is character. In
America’s first century, we possessed it in abundance and even though there were no think tanks,
very little economic education, and even less policy
research, it kept our liberties substantially intact.
People generally opposed the expansion of government power not because they read policy studies
or earned degrees in economics, but because they
placed a high priority on character. Using government to get something at somebody else’s expense,
or mortgaging the future for near-term gain, seemed
dishonest and cynical to them, if not downright sinful and immoral.
One of the strongest arguments for liberty, in
my mind, is the fact that it is the one and only social/political/economic arrangement that demands
high character. No other man-designed or centrally
planned concoction does. For a people to be free,
they must seek to live by the highest standards of
character.
Within government, character is what differentiates a politician from a statesman. Statesmen don’t
seek public office for personal gain or attention. They
often are people who take time out from productive
careers to temporarily serve the public. They don’t
have to work for government because that’s all they
know how to do. They stand for a principled vision,
Are We Good Enough for Liberty? 31
not for what they think citizens will fall for. When a
statesman gets elected, he doesn’t forget the publicspirited citizens who sent him to office, becoming a
mouthpiece for the permanent bureaucracy or some
special interest that greased his campaign.
Because they seek the truth, statesmen are more
likely to do what’s right than what may be politically
popular at the moment. You know where they stand
because they say what they mean and they mean
what they say. They do not engage in class warfare,
race-baiting, or other divisive or partisan tactics that
pull people apart. They do not buy votes with tax
dollars. They don’t make promises they can’t keep
or intend to break. They take responsibility for their
actions. A statesman doesn’t try to pull himself up
by dragging somebody else down, and he doesn’t
try to convince people they’re victims just so he can
posture as their savior.
Unthinkably Bad Policies
When it comes to managing public finances, statesmen prioritize. They don’t behave as though
government deserves an endlessly larger share of
other people’s money. They exhibit the courage to
cut less important expenses to make way for more
pressing ones. They don’t try to build empires.
Instead, they keep government within its proper
bounds and trust in what free and enterprising people can accomplish. Politicians think that they’re
smart enough to plan other people’s lives; statesmen
are wise enough to understand what utter folly such
32 Are We Good Enough for Liberty?
arrogant attitudes really are. Statesmen, in other
words, possess a level of character that an ordinary
politician does not.
We’ve heard a lot of talk lately about certain companies being “too big to fail.” But in dealing with this
supposed problem, we’ve handed huge chunks of
our lives and economy over to a government that is
arguably too big to succeed. We’ve put the country
on the road to financial insolvency. People of character don’t do that. To a genuine statesman, such
policies would be unthinkable.
By almost any measure, the standards we as citizens keep and expect of those we elect have slipped
badly in recent years. Though everybody complains
about politicians who pander, perhaps they do it because we are increasingly a pander-able people. Too
many are willing to look the other way when politicians misbehave, as long as they are of the right party
or deliver the goods we personally want.
Our celebrity-drenched culture focuses incessantly on the vapid and the irresponsible. Our role
models would make our grandparents cringe. To
many, insisting on sterling character seems too
straight-laced and old-fashioned. We cut corners
and sacrifice character all the time for power, money,
attention, or other ephemeral gratifications.
Bad character leads to bad policy and bad
economics, which is bad for liberty. Ultimately,
whether we live free and in harmony with the
laws of nature or stumble in the dark thrall
of dependency and tyranny is less a political
Are We Good Enough for Liberty? 33
or economic issue than it is a character issue.
Without character, a free society is not just unlikely, it’s impossible.
In June 2003, my best friend and business colleague Joe Overton was killed in a plane crash at
the age of forty-three. He taught me more about the
importance of character than anyone else I have ever
known. He could teach it because he lived it. While
composing a eulogy for his funeral, I came across
a few lines about what the world needs. I’ve never
learned who the author was so I can’t offer appropriate credit, and in any event, I added a lot to it. It
not only describes what the world desperately needs,
it described my friend Joe perfectly. I share it with
you as I close:
The world needs more men and women who do
not have a price at which they can be bought;
who do not borrow from integrity to pay for expediency; who have their priorities straight and
in proper order; whose handshake is an ironclad
contract; who are not afraid of taking risks to
advance what is right; and who are as honest in
small matters as they are in large ones.
The world needs more men and women whose
ambitions are big enough to include others; who
know how to win with grace and lose with dignity;
who do not believe that shrewdness and cunning
and ruthlessness are the three keys to success; who
still have friends they made twenty years ago; who
put principle and consistency above politics or
34 Are We Good Enough for Liberty?
personal advancement; and who are not afraid
to go against the grain of popular opinion.
The world needs more men and women who
do not forsake what is right just to get consensus
because it makes them look good; who know how
important it is to lead by example, not by barking
orders; who would not have you do something
they would not do themselves; who work to turn
even the most adverse circumstances into opportunities to learn and improve; who respect the
lives, property, and rights of their fellow men and
women; and who love even those who have done
some injustice or unfairness to them.
The world, in other words, needs more men and
women of character.
Make this day the start of a lifelong commitment
to building character. Be the kind of virtuous example that others will respect, admire, emulate,
and remember. Ask yourself every day, “Am I good
enough for liberty?” and if you come up short, work
on it. You’ll not only go to your reward some day
with a smile and a clear conscience, you will enhance
many other lives along the way. How can any of us
settle for any less?
Introduction: The Character
Message of “I, Pencil”
More than half a century ago (December 1958, to be
precise), the Foundation for Economic Education
(FEE) published for the first time an essay with a
humble title, “I, Pencil.” The author was Leonard
E. Read, FEE’s founder, and before he died in 1983
he realized he had penned a classic. Many first-time
readers of it never see the world quite the same
again. Its message? No one person—repeat, no one,
no matter how smart or how many degrees follow his
name—could create from scratch, entirely by himself,
a small, everyday pencil, let alone a car or an airplane.
“I, Pencil” is more than an ingenious explanation
of the wondrous, even miraculous, workings of a free
market. We include it here as part of this book about
character because it speaks volumes about one of
the most important character traits a free society
requires—humility.
Think about it: a mere pencil—a simple thing,
yet beyond any one person’s complete comprehension. Think what went into it: the mining of zinc,
graphite, and copper; the logging of cedar or other
wood, and all the technology involved in the saws,
trucks, rope, and railroads that took it from the forest to the factory; the castor beans that became an
ingredient in the lacquer; the dozens of chemicals
35
36 Are We Good Enough for Liberty?
found or produced and then distilled into the pencil’s parts, from the eraser to the glue that holds it
all together. Countless people and skills assemble
miraculously in the marketplace without a single
mastermind, indeed, without anyone who knows
more than a corner of the whole process.
It is a message that humbles the high and mighty.
It pricks the inflated egos of those who think they
know how to mind everybody else’s business. It explains in plain language why central planning of a
society or an economy is an exercise in arrogance
and futility, or what Nobel Prize-winning economist
F. A. Hayek termed “a pretense to knowledge.” If I
can’t make a pencil, I’d better be careful about how
smart I think I am.
Maximilian Robespierre blessed the horrific
French Revolution with this chilling declaration,
“On ne saurait faire une omelette sans casser des
oeufs.” Translation: “One can’t expect to make an
omelet without breaking eggs.” He labored tirelessly
to plan the lives of others and became the architect
of the Revolution’s bloodiest phase—the Reign of
Terror. Robespierre and his guillotine broke eggs by
the thousands in a vain effort to impose a utopian
society with government planners at the top and
everybody else at the bottom.
That French experience is one example in a
disturbingly familiar pattern. Call them what you
will—socialist, interventionist, collectivist, statist—
history is littered with their presumptuous plans for
rearranging society to fit their vision of the common
Are We Good Enough for Liberty? 37
good, plans that always fail as they kill or impoverish
people in the process. If big government ever earns a
final epitaph, it will be this: “Here lies a contrivance
engineered by know-it-alls who broke eggs with
abandon but never, ever created an omelet.”
None of the Robespierres of the world knew how
to make a pencil, yet they wanted to make entire
societies. How utterly preposterous, and mournfully
tragic! The Robespierres, the Hitlers, and the Stalins
of the world didn’t suffer from low self-esteem.
Liberty requires men and women of character who know their limitations, who are humble
enough to realize they can’t possibly plan the lives
and economy of hundreds of millions of people.
Socialism and central planning are the delusions of
ego-maniacs and are no part of the vision of people
of introspection and character.
We will miss a large implication of Leonard Read’s
message if we assume it aims only at the tyrants
whose names we all know. The lesson of “I, Pencil”
is not that error begins when the planners plan big.
It begins the moment one tosses humility aside, assumes he knows the unknowable, and employs the
force of government to control more and more of
other people’s lives. That’s not just a national disease.
It can be very local indeed.
In our midst are people who think that if only they
had government power on their side, they could pick
tomorrow’s winners and losers in the marketplace,
set prices or rents where they ought to be, decide
which forms of energy should power our homes and
38 Are We Good Enough for Liberty?
cars, and choose which industries should survive
and which should die. They make grandiose promises they can’t possibly keep without bankrupting all
of us. They should stop for a few moments and learn
a little humility from a lowly writing implement.
Now, please enjoy Leonard E. Read’s remarkable
“I, Pencil.”
I, Pencil
By Leonard E. Read
I am a lead pencil—the ordinary wooden pencil familiar to all boys and girls and adults who can read
and write.
Writing is both my vocation and my avocation;
that’s all I do.
You may wonder why I should write a genealogy. Well, to begin with, my story is interesting.
And, next, I am a mystery—more so than a tree or a
sunset or even a flash of lightning. But, sadly, I am
taken for granted by those who use me, as if I were
a mere incident and without background. This supercilious attitude relegates me to the level of the
commonplace. This is a species of the grievous error
in which mankind cannot too long persist without
peril. For, the wise G. K. Chesterton observed, “We
are perishing for want of wonder, not for want of
wonders.”
I, Pencil, simple though I appear to be, merit your
wonder and awe, a claim I shall attempt to prove. In
fact, if you can understand me—no, that’s too much
to ask of anyone—if you can become aware of the
miraculousness which I symbolize, you can help
save the freedom mankind is so unhappily losing. I
have a profound lesson to teach. And I can teach this
lesson better than can an automobile or an airplane
39
40 Are We Good Enough for Liberty?
or a mechanical dishwasher because—well, because
I am seemingly so simple.
Simple? Yet, not a single person on the face of this
earth knows how to make me. This sounds fantastic,
doesn’t it? Especially when it is realized that there
are about one and one-half billion of my kind produced in the United States each year.
Pick me up and look me over. What do you see?
Not much meets the eye—there’s some wood, lacquer, the printed labeling, graphite lead, a bit of
metal, and an eraser.
Innumerable Antecedents
Just as you cannot trace your family tree back very
far, so is it impossible for me to name and explain all
my antecedents. But I would like to suggest enough
of them to impress upon you the richness and complexity of my background.
My family tree begins with what in fact is a tree,
a cedar of straight grain that grows in northern
California and Oregon. Now contemplate all the
saws and trucks and rope and the countless other
gear used in harvesting and carting the cedar logs
to the railroad siding. Think of all the persons and
the numberless skills that went into their fabrication: the mining of ore, the making of steel and its
refinement into saws, axes, motors; the growing of
hemp and bringing it through all the stages to heavy
and strong rope; the logging camps with their beds
and mess halls, the cookery and the raising of all the
Are We Good Enough for Liberty? 41
foods. Why, untold thousands of persons had a hand
in every cup of coffee the loggers drink!
The logs are shipped to a mill in San Leandro,
California. Can you imagine the individuals who
make flat cars and rails and railroad engines and
who construct and install the communication systems incidental thereto? These legions are among
my antecedents.
Consider the millwork in San Leandro. The cedar
logs are cut into small, pencil-length slats less than
one-fourth of an inch in thickness. These are kiln
dried and then tinted for the same reason women
put rouge on their faces. People prefer that I look
pretty, not a pallid white. The slats are waxed and
kiln dried again. How many skills went into the making of the tint and the kilns, into supplying the heat,
the light and power, the belts, motors, and all the
other things a mill requires? Sweepers in the mill
among my ancestors? Yes, and included are the men
who poured the concrete for the dam of a Pacific Gas
& Electric Company hydroplant which supplies the
mill’s power!
Don’t overlook the ancestors present and distant
who have a hand in transporting sixty carloads of
slats across the nation.
Once in the pencil factory—$4,000,000 in machinery and building, all capital accumulated by
thrifty and saving parents of mine—each slat is given
eight grooves by a complex machine, after which another machine lays leads in every other slat, applies
glue, and places another slat atop—a lead sandwich,
42 Are We Good Enough for Liberty?
so to speak. Seven brothers and I are mechanically
carved from this “wood-clinched” sandwich.
My “lead” itself—it contains no lead at all—is complex. The graphite is mined in Ceylon [Sri Lanka].
Consider these miners and those who make their
many tools and the makers of the paper sacks in
which the graphite is shipped and those who make
the string that ties the sacks and those who put them
aboard ships and those who make the ships. Even
the lighthouse keepers along the way assisted in my
birth—and the harbor pilots.
The graphite is mixed with clay from Mississippi
in which ammonium hydroxide is used in the refining process. Then wetting agents are added such as
sulfonated tallow—animal fats chemically reacted
with sulfuric acid. After passing through numerous
machines, the mixture finally appears as endless
extrusions—as from a sausage grinder—cut to size,
dried, and baked for several hours at 1,850 degrees
Fahrenheit. To increase their strength and smoothness the leads are then treated with a hot mixture
which includes candelilla wax from Mexico, paraffin
wax, and hydrogenated natural fats.
My cedar receives six coats of lacquer. Do you
know all the ingredients of lacquer? Who would
think that the growers of castor beans and the refiners of castor oil are a part of it? They are. Why,
even the processes by which the lacquer is made a
beautiful yellow involve the skills of more persons
than one can enumerate!
Observe the labeling. That’s a film formed by
Are We Good Enough for Liberty? 43
applying heat to carbon black mixed with resins.
How do you make resins and what, pray, is carbon
black?
My bit of metal—the ferrule—is brass. Think of
all the persons who mine zinc and copper and those
who have the skills to make shiny sheet brass from
these products of nature. Those black rings on my
ferrule are black nickel. What is black nickel and
how is it applied? The complete story of why the
center of my ferrule has no black nickel on it would
take pages to explain.
Then there’s my crowning glory, inelegantly referred to in the trade as “the plug,” the part man uses
to erase the errors he makes with me. An ingredient called “factice” is what does the erasing. It is a
rubber-like product made by reacting rapeseed oil
from the Dutch East Indies [Indonesia] with sulfur
chloride. Rubber, contrary to the common notion,
is only for binding purposes. Then, too, there are
numerous vulcanizing and accelerating agents. The
pumice comes from Italy; and the pigment which
gives “the plug” its color is cadmium sulfide.
No One Knows
Does anyone wish to challenge my earlier assertion
that no single person on the face of this earth knows
how to make me?
Actually, millions of human beings have had a
hand in my creation, no one of whom even knows
more than a very few of the others. Now, you may
say that I go too far in relating the picker of a coffee
44 Are We Good Enough for Liberty?
berry in far-off Brazil and food growers elsewhere
to my creation; that this is an extreme position. I
shall stand by my claim. There isn’t a single person
in all these millions, including the president of the
pencil company, who contributes more than a tiny,
infinitesimal bit of know-how. From the standpoint
of know-how the only difference between the miner
of graphite in Ceylon and the logger in Oregon is in
the type of know-how. Neither the miner nor the
logger can be dispensed with, any more than can the
chemist at the factory or the worker in the oil field—
paraffin being a by-product of petroleum.
Here is an astounding fact: Neither the worker
in the oil field nor the chemist nor the digger of
graphite or clay nor any who mans or makes the
ships or trains or trucks nor the one who runs the
machine that does the knurling on my bit of metal
nor the president of the company performs his singular task because he wants me. Each one wants
me less, perhaps, than does a child in the first grade.
Indeed, there are some among this vast multitude
who never saw a pencil nor would they know how to
use one. Their motivation is other than me. Perhaps
it is something like this: Each of these millions sees
that he can thus exchange his tiny know-how for the
goods and services he needs or wants. I may or may
not be among these items.
No Master Mind
There is a fact still more astounding: the absence
of a master mind, of anyone dictating or forcibly
Are We Good Enough for Liberty? 45
directing these countless actions which bring me
into being. No trace of such a person can be found.
Instead, we find the “Invisible Hand” at work. This
is the mystery to which I earlier referred.
It has been said that “only God can make a tree.”
Why do we agree with this? Isn’t it because we realize that we ourselves could not make one? Indeed,
can we even describe a tree? We cannot, except in
superficial terms. We can say, for instance, that a
certain molecular configuration manifests itself as a
tree. But what mind is there among men that could
even record, let alone direct, the constant changes
in molecules that transpire in the life span of a tree?
Such a feat is utterly unthinkable!
I, Pencil, am a complex combination of miracles:
a tree, zinc, copper, graphite, and so on. But to these
miracles which manifest themselves in nature an
even more extraordinary miracle has been added:
the configuration of creative human energies—millions of tiny know-hows configurating naturally and
spontaneously in response to human necessity and
desire and in the absence of any human masterminding! Since only God can make a tree, I insist that
only God could make me. Man can no more direct
these millions of know-hows to bring me into being
than he can put molecules together to create a tree.
The above is what I meant when writing, “If you
can become aware of the miraculousness which I
symbolize, you can help save the freedom mankind
is so unhappily losing.” For, if one is aware that
these know-hows will naturally, yes, automatically,
46 Are We Good Enough for Liberty?
arrange themselves into creative and productive
patterns in response to human necessity and demand—that is, in the absence of governmental or
any other coercive master-minding—then one will
possess an absolutely essential ingredient for freedom: a faith in free people. Freedom is impossible
without this faith.
Once government has had a monopoly of a creative activity such, for instance, as the delivery of
the mails, most individuals will believe that the mail
could not be efficiently delivered by men acting
freely. And here is the reason: Each one acknowledges that he himself doesn’t know how to do all the
things incident to mail delivery. He also recognizes
that no other individual could do it. These assumptions are correct. No individual possesses enough
know-how to perform a nation’s mail delivery any
more than any individual possesses enough knowhow to make a pencil. Now, in the absence of faith in
free people—in the unawareness that millions of tiny
know-hows would naturally and miraculously form
and cooperate to satisfy this necessity—the individual cannot help but reach the erroneous conclusion
that mail can be delivered only by governmental
“masterminding.”
Testimony Galore
If I, Pencil, were the only item that could offer testimony on what men and women can accomplish
when free to try, then those with little faith would
have a fair case. However, there is testimony galore;
Are We Good Enough for Liberty? 47
it’s all about us and on every hand. Mail delivery is
exceedingly simple when compared, for instance,
to the making of an automobile or a calculating machine or a grain combine or a milling machine or to
tens of thousands of other things. Delivery? Why,
in this area where men have been left free to try,
they deliver the human voice around the world in
less than one second; they deliver an event visually
and in motion to any person’s home when it is happening; they deliver 150 passengers from Seattle to
Baltimore in less than four hours; they deliver gas
from Texas to one’s range or furnace in New York
at unbelievably low rates and without subsidy; they
deliver each four pounds of oil from the Persian
Gulf to our Eastern Seaboard—halfway around the
world—for less money than the government charges
for delivering a one-ounce letter across the street!
The lesson I have to teach is this: Leave all creative energies uninhibited. Merely organize society
to act in harmony with this lesson. Let society’s
legal apparatus remove all obstacles the best it can.
Permit these creative know-hows freely to flow.
Have faith that free men and women will respond
to the Invisible Hand. This faith will be confirmed.
I, Pencil, seemingly simple though I am, offer the
miracle of my creation as testimony that this is a
practical faith, as practical as the sun, the rain, a
cedar tree, the good earth.
Afterword
By Milton Friedman, Nobel Laureate, 1976
Leonard Read’s delightful story, “I, Pencil,” has become a classic, and deservedly so. I know of no
other piece of literature that so succinctly, persuasively, and effectively illustrates the meaning of both
Adam Smith’s Invisible Hand—the possibility of cooperation without coercion—and Friedrich Hayek’s
emphasis on the importance of dispersed knowledge
and the role of the price system in communicating
information that “will make the individuals do the
desirable things without anyone having to tell them
what to do.”
We used Leonard’s story in our television show,
Free to Choose, and in the accompanying book of
the same title to illustrate “the power of the market”
(the title of both the first segment of the TV show
and chapter one of the book). We summarized the
story and then went on to say:
None of the thousands of persons involved in producing the pencil performed his task because he
wanted a pencil. Some among them never saw a
pencil and would not know what it is for. Each
saw his work as a way to get the goods and services
he wanted—goods and services we produced in
order to get the pencil we wanted. Every time we
49
50 Are We Good Enough for Liberty?
go to the store and buy a pencil, we are exchanging a little bit of our services for the infinitesimal
amount of services that each of the thousands contributed toward producing the pencil.
It is even more astounding that the pencil was
ever produced. No one sitting in a central office
gave orders to these thousands of people. No military police enforced the orders that were not given.
These people live in many lands, speak different
languages, practice different religions, may even
hate one another—yet none of these differences
prevented them from cooperating to produce a
pencil. How did it happen? Adam Smith gave us
the answer two hundred years ago.
“I, Pencil” is a typical Leonard Read product:
imaginative, simple yet subtle, breathing the love of
freedom that imbued everything Leonard wrote or
did. As in the rest of his work, he was not trying to
tell people what to do or how to conduct themselves.
He was simply trying to enhance individuals’ understanding of themselves and of the system they live in.
That was his basic credo and one that he stuck
to consistently during his long period of service to
the public—not public service in the sense of government service. Whatever the pressure, he stuck
to his guns, refusing to compromise his principles.
That was why he was so effective in keeping alive,
in the early days, and then spreading the basic idea
that human freedom required private property, free
competition, and severely limited government.
Resources and Background
• Business Ethics
“Would You Lie To Get Ahead?”
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-500395_16257472768/would-you-lie-to-get-ahead/
A recent report by corporate governance specialist
Labaton Sucharow showed that 24 percent of financial services executives polled by the law firm believed
that unethical or illegal conduct might be required for
professional success. Moreover, 16 percent said that
they would commit a crime if they thought they could
get away with it.
“Ethical Warning Looming in U.S. Workplaces”
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/ethicalwarning-looming-in-us-workplaces-2012-01-23
Last year, nearly 8.8 million Americans felt the sting
of workplace retaliation—a 33 percent increase in
negative payback from the year before. That surge,
identified by the Ethics Resource Center in its biennial
survey of ethics in the workplace, is an ominous trend
that strongly suggests that ethics violations at U.S. companies are about to go up.
51
52 Are We Good Enough for Liberty?
• Among workers who reported misconduct, more
than one in five experienced retaliation in return.
• A growing number of employees say they feel pressure to compromise standards.
• Fewer workers believe senior leadership is committed to ethical conduct. A growing number (40
percent) say their direct supervisors don’t display
ethical behavior.
• Ethics cultures are on decline. At 47 percent, the
share of businesses with weak cultures is near an
all-time high.
“Key Findings, 2011 National Business Ethics
Survey (NBES)”
http://www.ethics.org/topic/national-surveys
• Reporting of misconduct is now at near highs.
• Retaliation against employee whistleblowers rose
sharply.
• The percentage of employees who perceived pressure to compromise standards in order to do
their jobs climbed five points since 2009 to 13
percent.
• The share of companies with weak ethics cultures
also climbed to near-record levels.
Are We Good Enough for Liberty? 53
“Ethics Study: More Employees Report Seeing
Illegal Donations”
http://www.rollcall.com/news/ethics_study_
more_employees_report_seeing_illegal_donations211451-1.html?pos=hftxt
The number of employees of major companies who
claim to have witnessed illegal contributions to public officials is four times higher than it was two years
ago, according to a new study from a business ethics
watchdog group.
Four percent of 4,600 private-sector employees surveyed this fall by the Ethics Resource Center said they
witnessed improper contributions to campaigns and
parties. By comparison, only 1 percent of respondents
reported these transgressions in the group’s previous
study, completed in 2009.
“Whistleblowers Face Most Corporate
Retaliation Ever in 2011”
http://articles.latimes.com/2012/jan/06/business/
la-fi-mo-whistleblower-backlash-20120106
More employees than ever before turned whistleblower
against unethical behavior last year, but they also suffered the highest amount of backlash in history from
their bosses. Nearly half of all workers witnessed some
sort of misconduct, according to a report from research
group Ethics Resource Center. Of those, 65 percent reported the wrongdoing—a record number. Also at an
54 Are We Good Enough for Liberty?
all-time high: the 22 percent of whistleblowers who
said their companies struck back at them for spilling
the beans. Companies tend to act differently in uncertain economic times, taking more risks as the business
environment improves, according to the ERC.
• Cheating
“75 to 98 Percent of College Students Have
Cheated”
http://education-portal.com/articles/75_to_98_
Percent_of_College_Students_Have_Cheated.html
Back in 1940, only 20 percent of college students admitted to cheating during their academic careers. Today,
that number has increased to a range of 75–98 percent.
“8 Astonishing Stats on Academic Cheating”
http://oedb.org/library/features/8-astonishingstats-on-academic-cheating
Some 60.8 percent of polled college students admitted to
cheating. An admittedly informal 2007 poll conducted
by the popular website CollegeHumor.com revealed
that 60.8 percent of 30,000 respondents—most of them
within its core demographic—confessed to cheating
on their assignments and tests. This lines up closely
with a questionnaire sent out to Rutgers students as
well, to which 68 percent of students confessed that
Are We Good Enough for Liberty? 55
they had broken the university’s explicit anti-cheating
rules. And the number only seems to swell as the years
progress, with freshmen the most likely to fudge their
way through class.
The same poll revealed that 16.5 percent of them
didn’t regret it. Probably the most disconcerting find
that the very same CollegeHumor poll unearthed is the
fact that 16.5 percent of those who admitted to cheating felt no guilt whatsoever for their breach of ethics.
It did not go into any details regarding why, of course,
but one wonders if today’s culture of entitlement and
success without regard to the well-being of others plays
a major role in such callous attitudes. With so many
scholarships, awards, internships, and other incentives
at stake, it’s entirely possible that those reporting no regrets considered their actions justified when rewarded
for their “success.”
• Dependency
“U.S. Government Increases National Debt—and
Keeps 128 Million People on Government Programs”
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2013/01/
us-government-increases-national-debtand-keeps128-million-people-on-government-programs
Between 1988 and 2011, the amount of the U.S.
population that receives assistance from the federal
government grew by 62 percent. That means that more
than 41 percent of the U.S. population is enrolled in at
56 Are We Good Enough for Liberty?
least one federal assistance program. To make matters
worse, per capita expenditures on recipients are rising
as well. In 2010, over 70 percent of all federal spending
went to dependence-creating programs.
“Government Dependents Outnumber Those with
Private Sector Jobs in 11 U.S. States”
www.westernjournalism.com/governmentdependents-outnumber-those-with-private-sectorjobs-in-11-u-s-states/
In 11 different U.S. states, the number of government
dependents exceeds the number of private sector
workers. This list of states includes some of the biggest
states in the country: California, New York, Illinois,
Ohio, Maine, Kentucky, South Carolina, Mississippi,
Alabama, New Mexico, and Hawaii.
• Financial Responsibility
“A Third of Public Says It’s Sometimes OK for
Homeowners to Stop Making Mortgage Payments”
Pew Research Center, 2010,
http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2010/09/15/
a-third-of-public-says-sometimes-ok-forhomeowners-to-stop-making-mortgage-payments
Are We Good Enough for Liberty? 57
A Barometer of Modern Morals
Pew Research Center, 2006
http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2006/03/28/
a-barometer-of-modern-morals/
Earlier this year the IRS reported that in 2001 (the last
year for which it had conducted such research) there
was a gross “tax gap” of $345 billion, resulting from
an overall non-compliance rate of about 16 percent. Of
that gap, the biggest missing slice, some $197 billion,
was from underreporting of income on individual income tax returns; most of that missing sum, in turn,
resulted from underreporting of business income on
those individual returns, the IRS found.
• Literature/Writing
“The Cultural Salience of Moral Character and
Virtue Declined in Twentieth Century America”
By Pelin Kesebir and Selin Kesebir, Journal of
Positive Psychology, 2012
http://www.papsyblog.org/2012/09/the-culturalsalience-of-moral.html
Abstract: In a large corpus of American books, we
tracked how frequently words related to moral excellence and virtue appeared over the twentieth century.
Considering the well-established cultural trend in
the United States toward greater individualism and
its implications for the moral domain, we predicted
58 Are We Good Enough for Liberty?
that morality and virtue terms would appear with diminishing frequency in American books. Two studies
supported our predictions: Study 1 showed a decline in
the use of general moral terms such as virtue, decency,
and conscience throughout the twentieth century. In
Study 2, we examined the appearance frequency of
fifty virtue words (e.g., honesty, patience, compassion)
and found a significant decline for 74 percent of them.
Overall, our findings suggest that during the twentieth
century, moral ideals and virtues have largely waned
from the public conversation. • Public Opinion
“Moral Values in Decline”
http://www.gallup.com/poll/147794/feweramericans-down-moral-values.aspx
About 7 in 10 Americans (69 percent) now say moral
values in the country as a whole are getting worse.
Roughly two-thirds—65 percent—now have a negative
view of moral values. This represents the percentage
of Americans who think moral values are only fair or
poor and either worsening or staying the same.
“Most Americans Say Moral Values in Decline”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/05/17/
most-americans-say-moral_n_579408.html
Are We Good Enough for Liberty? 59
Three-quarters of Americans say the country’s moral
values are worsening. The number of Americans who
say the nation’s moral values are in decline grew by 5
percent since last year.
Pollsters also found 45 percent of Americans believe
that current moral values are in a poor state. This
number is equal to last year’s, which was the highest
since 2002. Only 15 percent of Americans believe the
country’s morality is in an excellent or good state.
“Poll: Americans Say Moral Values Getting Worse”
http://www.christianpost.com/news/pollamericans-say-moral-values-getting-worse-22055/
#Aed4kygF95xTyFPl.99 Some 81 percent of adults say the nation’s “state of
moral values” is getting worse, compared to only 11
percent who say values are improving.
“Why Young Americans Can’t Think Morally”
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/277693/
why-young-americans-can-t-think-morally-dennisprager
When asked to describe a moral dilemma they had
faced, two-thirds of the young people either couldn’t
answer the question or described problems that are not
moral at all. Moral thinking didn’t enter the picture,
60 Are We Good Enough for Liberty?
even when considering things like drunken driving,
cheating in school or cheating on a partner.
The default position, which most of them came back
to again and again, is that moral choices are just a
matter of individual taste.
As one put it, “I mean, I guess what makes something
right is how I feel about it. But different people feel different ways, so I couldn’t speak on behalf of anyone else
as to what’s right and wrong.”
Morality was once revealed, inherited, and shared,
but now it’s thought of as something that emerges in
the privacy of your own heart.
About the Author
Lawrence W. (“Larry”) Reed is president of the
Foundation for Economic Education (FEE) in
Atlanta, Georgia. He became president of FEE in
2008. Prior to that, he was a founder and president for twenty years of the Mackinac Center for
Public Policy in Midland, Michigan. He also taught
Economics full time and chaired the Department of
Economics at Northwood University in Michigan
from 1977 to 1984.
He holds a BA degree in economics from Grove
City College (1975) and an MA degree in history
from Slippery Rock State University (1978), both
in Pennsylvania. He holds two honorary doctorates, one from Central Michigan University (public
administration, 1993) and Northwood University
(laws, 2008).
A champion for liberty, Reed has authored over
one thousand newspaper columns and articles, and
dozens of articles in magazines and journals in the
United States and abroad. His writings have appeared in The Wall Street Journal, Christian Science
Monitor, USA Today, Baltimore Sun, Detroit News,
and Detroit Free Press, among many others. He has
authored or co-authored five books, the most recent ones being A Republic—If We Can Keep It and
Striking the Root: Essays on Liberty. He is frequently
interviewed on radio talk shows and has appeared as
61
62 Are We Good Enough for Liberty?
a guest on numerous television programs, including
those anchored by Judge Andrew Napolitano and
John Stossel on FOX Business News.
Reed has delivered at least seventy-five speeches
annually in the past thirty years—in virtually every
state and dozens of countries from Bulgaria to China
to Bolivia. His best-known lectures include “Seven
Principles of Sound Policy” and “Great Myths of
the Great Depression”—both of which have been
translated into more than a dozen languages and
distributed worldwide.
His interests in political and economic affairs
have taken him as a freelance journalist to eightyone countries on six continents. He is a member of
the prestigious Mont Pelerin Society and an advisor
to numerous organizations around the world. He
served for fifteen years as a member of the board
(and one term as president) of the State Policy
Network. His numerous recognitions include the
“Champion of Freedom” award from the Mackinac
Center for Public Policy and the “Distinguished
Alumni” award from Grove City College.
He is a native of Pennsylvania and a thirty-year
resident of Michigan, and now resides in Newnan,
Georgia.
About FEE
The mission of the Foundation for Economic
Education (FEE) is to inspire, educate, and connect future leaders with the economic, ethical, and
legal principles of a free society. For young minds interested in an introduction
to free market economics and its foundations in
the broader philosophy of individual liberty, FEE
is the best source for inspiring content, programs,
and community. FEE is not an academic or political organization; instead our focus is making the
economic, ethical, and legal principles of a free
society widely accessible, easily understood, and
energizing to young minds. We do this by delivering
content that is substantive and thoughtful in forms
most convenient to our customers, including in-person seminars and lectures, web-delivered content,
printed material in book and magazine form, and
networking opportunities. At FEE, young people—
and educators who work with them—will find an
exciting and optimistic introduction to the Austrian
and classical liberal traditions in free-market economics as well as opportunities to connect with
other young people and free-market organizations
around the world.
63
64 Are We Good Enough for Liberty?
History
FEE was founded in 1946 by Leonard E. Read to
study and advance the freedom philosophy. During
its long and illustrious history, FEE has published
or hosted lectures by some of the finest minds of
the modern age, including Ludwig von Mises, F.A.
Hayek, Henry Hazlitt, Milton Friedman, James
Buchanan, Vernon Smith, Israel Kirzner, Walter
Williams, George Stigler, Frank Chodorov, John
Chamberlain, F.A. “Baldy” Harper, and William F.
Buckley Jr., among many others.
Programs
Through our website, our magazine The Freeman,
our summer seminars, and a constant stream of
online resources and activities, FEE is continually focused on providing high school and college
students with the inspiration, education, and networking they need to become effective advocates
for liberty and the free-market system. We hope you
will explore our website (www.FEE.org) in depth
and find what you need. If you have any questions,
do not hesitate to contact us at info@fee.org.
The Foundation for Economic Education is a
non-political, non-profit, tax-exempt educational
foundation and accepts no taxpayer money. FEE is
supported solely by contributions from private individuals, foundations, and businesses and by the sales
of its publications.
The Blinking Lights Initiative
The Blinking Lights Initiative is a project of FEE
which reaches out to individuals in an attempt to
educate America’s youth with the importance of
character and personal responsibility in the achievement of a free society. This essay on the connection
between liberty and character is a vital component
of that project and you can find more videos, essays,
and other resources at www.FEE.org/blinkinglights.
The name of the project came from one of
Lawrence Reed’s favorite stories from a trip he took
to Poland in the late 1980s. It involves a very brave
couple, Zbigniew and Sofia Romaszewski. They had
only lately been released from prison for running
an underground radio station. “How did you know
when you were broadcasting if people were listening?” Larry asked. Sofia answered, “We could only
broadcast eight to ten minutes at a time before going to another place to stay ahead of the police. One
night we asked people to blink their lights if they
believed in freedom for Poland. We then went to the
window and for hours, all of Warsaw was blinking.”
We hope you will become a Blinking Light after
reading this essay.
65
Help Bring the Message of
Character and Liberty to
Everyone
Support FEE today!
{{{[development page]}}}
{{{Unfinished Page}}}
66
Index
abolition, abolitionism 19–21
Amazing Grace 2, 19
arrogant 14, 32, 36
barbarity 13, 19
basketball 5
bitterness 16
Blessed Assurance 27
Blinking Lights Project 2, 65
Braddock, James 17–18
Buffet, Warren 7
Cambodia 7–10
Carnegie, Dale 14
celebrities 32
central-planner, central planning 14, 36–7
Character and Education
Project 17
cheating 9, 10, 13, 14, 54–55,
60
Chesterton, G. K. 39
children 23–25, 28, 44
choices 12, 60
Cinderella Man 17–18
citizens 14, 31, 32
class warfare 31
closed-minded 14
communists 1, 8,
compassion 58
conscience 1, 7, 10, 12, 19, 21,
34, 58
cooperate, cooperation 46,
49, 50
corruption, 11, 13, 29
courage 3, 6, 14, 31
Covey, Stephen 14
Crosby, Fanny 27
decency 58
dependency 14, 32, 55–56
dignity 33
dishonest 14, 30
dishonorable 26
economic education 29–30
economics 28, 29, 30, 32, 33,
54, 63
emancipation 21
Emmons, Robert A. Dr.,
15–16
enthusiasm 15
entitlement 55
entrepreneur, ship 2
envy 16
ethanol subsidies 29
ethics 51–53, 55
Ethics Resource Center 51, 53
faith 10, 13, 46, 47
faithful 13
financial insolvency 32
financial responsibility 56
France 20,
Frank, Anne 21–22
free competition 50
free economy 28
free government 25
free market 35, 63, 64
free society 1–2, 13, 28, 29, 33,
35, 63, 65
Free to Choose 49
freedom 2, 14, 39, 45, 46, 50,
64, 65
French Revolution 36
Friedman, Milton 49–50, 64
Gladstone, William Ewart 2, 3
Gordian Knot 26–27
government 11, 23, 25, 26, 27,
67
68 Are We Good Enough for Liberty?
30, 31, 32, 36, 37, 46, 47,
50, 55, 56
grace 33
gratitude 15–16
Great Britain 24
Greatest Game Ever Played,
The 18
greed 16
guilt 55
handout 11, 30
happiness 15, 16, 26
Hayek, F. A. 36, 49, 64
standards 7, 12, 20, 25, 29, 30,
32, 52
Hitler 23, 24, 37
honest Cambodian man 7–9
honesty 2, 5, 7, 13, 33, 58
honor 13, 18
How to Win Friends and
Influence People 14
humility, humble 13, 14, 35,
36, 37, 38
Hyatt, Mark 17
I, Pencil 35–38, 39–47
illegal conduct 1, 51, 53
immoral 26, 30
injustice 27, 34
integrity 7, 11, 18, 28, 33
Invisible Hand 45, 47, 49
irresponsible 14, 32
Jefferson, Thomas 5, 26
Jews 23–25
Journal of Positive Psychology
15, 57
joy 15
Khmer Rouge 8
Killing Fields, The 7
laws of nature 32
leadership 12, 52
learning 13, 14
liberties 1, 28, 29, 30
liberty 1, 2, 13, 25, 27, 29, 30,
32, 34, 37, 60
lie, lying 13, 14, 51,
limited government 50
love 2, 15, 34, 50
Mackinac Center for Public
Policy 11, 61–62
Marx, “Groucho” 18
Maxwell, John 14
money 8, 9, 11, 26, 31, 32,
47, 64
moral values, morality, morals
16, 25, 57–60
National Business Ethics
Survey, 2011 52
national debt 55
Nazis 22–24
New York Times, The 10
Ngor, Haing St., Dr. 7
optimism 14, 15, 21, 22
Ouimet, Francis 18
Overton, Joe 33
Parliament 19, 20, 21
patience 13, 58
Paul, The Apostle 10
Poland 1–2, 65
political correctness 28
politicians 11, 29, 30–32
popular culture 29
power, powerful 1, 2, 6, 19,
20, 21, 22, 25, 30, 32, 37,
41, 49
principle 2, 18, 30, 33, 50, 60,
62, 63
private property 50
property 34
public opinion 58
public-policy research 29
race-baiting 31
Read, Leonard E. 35–38, 39–
47, 49–50, 64
resentment 16
respect 34
responsibility 14, 31, 56, 65
rights 14, 34
Are We Good Enough for Liberty? 69
Robespierre, Maximilian
36, 37
Rockdale Bulldogs (Conyers,
Georgia, High School) 5
Romaszewski, Zbigniew and
Sofia 1, 65
Rutgers University 54
ruthlessness 33
Self Help 14
self-discipline 12, 14
self-government 27
self-improvement 15–16
self-reliance 14
Seven Habits of Highly
Effective People, The 14
shame 30
shrewdness 33
sinful 30
slavery 19–21
Smiles, Samuel 14
Smith, Adam 49–50
socialism 37
Soviet Union 1
special interest 31
Stalin, Joseph 37
statesman 30–32
stealing 13, 17
Steinmetz High School
(Chicago) 9
Thanks! How Practicing
Gratitude Can Make You
Happier 15
theft 30
truth 27, 28, 29, 31
21 Indispensable Qualities of a
Leader, The 14
tyranny 13, 32,
unethical 51, 53
unfairness 34
Vardon, Harry 18
virtue 25, 26, 57, 58
vision 19, 30, 36, 37
voters 11
Washington Farewell Address
of 1796 25
Washington, George 25
whistleblowers 52, 53, 54
Wilberforce, William 19–21
Winton, Nicholas 23–25
workplace retaliation 51, 52,
53
World War II 24
“One night we asked people to
blink their lights if they believed in
freedom for Poland. We went to
the window, and for hours, all of
Warsaw was blinking.”
This book is part of FEE’s “Blinking Lights Project,”
which demonstrates the vital connection between
good personal character and liberty.
Join the initiative at:
FEE.org/blinkinglights
On the Kindle app for your
smartphone, computer, or tablet.
“To suppose that any form of government will secure liberty or
happiness without any virtue in the people, is a chimerical idea.”
—James Madison
“Bad character leads to bad policy and bad economics, which is bad for
liberty,” writes the author. “Without character, a free society is not just
unlikely, it is impossible.” This little book makes the case that character
is indispensable for liberty, in America or anywhere else in the world.
Please consider giving copies of Are We Good Enough for Liberty?
to students and teachers, local political leaders, business and labor
associations, the news media, and to your activist friends all across
America. Knowledge is power in political debate. This book will give
you that power.
Special Bulk Copy Discount Schedule
1 book $3.95
5 books $17.00
10 books $27.00
25 books $50.00
50 books $95.00
100 books $125.00
500 books $475.00
1000 books $850.00
All prices include postage and handling.
Jameson Books, Inc Post Office Box 738 Ottawa, IL 61350
ORDER TOLL FREE
800-426-1357
Please send me ______ copies of Are We Good Enough for Liberty?
Enclosed is my check for $ _______
or charge my [ ] MasterCard [ ] Visa [ ] Discover card:
No._________________________________________ Exp. Date_______
Signature___________________________________________________
Telephone __________________________________________________
Name______________________________________________________
Address_____________________________________________________
City_____________________________State______Zip______________
Illinois residents please add 6.5% sales tax. Please allow 10 days for delivery.
“To suppose that any form of government will secure liberty or
happiness without any virtue in the people, is a chimerical idea.”
—James Madison
“Bad character leads to bad policy and bad economics, which is bad for
liberty,” writes the author. “Without character, a free society is not just
unlikely, it is impossible.” This little book makes the case that character
is indispensable for liberty, in America or anywhere else in the world.
Please consider giving copies of Are We Good Enough for Liberty?
to students and teachers, local political leaders, business and labor
associations, the news media, and to your activist friends all across
America. Knowledge is power in political debate. This book will give
you that power.
Special Bulk Copy Discount Schedule
1 book $3.95
5 books $17.00
10 books $27.00
25 books $50.00
50 books $95.00
100 books $125.00
500 books $475.00
1000 books $850.00
All prices include postage and handling.
Jameson Books, Inc Post Office Box 738 Ottawa, IL 61350
ORDER TOLL FREE
800-426-1357
Please send me ______ copies of Are We Good Enough for Liberty?
Enclosed is my check for $ _______
or charge my [ ] MasterCard [ ] Visa [ ] Discover card:
No._________________________________________ Exp. Date_______
Signature___________________________________________________
Telephone __________________________________________________
Name______________________________________________________
Address_____________________________________________________
City_____________________________State______Zip______________
Illinois residents please add 6.5% sales tax. Please allow 10 days for delivery.